Smith v. Wisconsin Mutual Insurance Company
Wisconsin Court of Appeals
369 Wis. 2d 244, 880 N.W.2d 183 (2016)
- Written by Kyli Cotten, JD
Facts
Thomas and Cary Smith (plaintiffs) owned an 11-year-old dog that was attacked by their neighbors’ (defendants) larger dog. As a result of the attack, the Smiths incurred over $12,000 in veterinary bills to save the dog’s life. The Smiths then brought suit against their neighbors under the Wisconsin dog-owner liability statute. The statute provided that when an owner had prior notice of the dog’s dangerous nature, a plaintiff could seek to double damages. Thus, the Smiths contended that they were entitled to recover two times the total veterinary expenses. The neighbors’ insurer, Wisconsin Mutual Insurance Company (Wisconsin Mutual) (defendant), sought a declaratory ruling as to the proper measure of damages, and argued that the proper measure was the lesser of the cost of repair or the dog’s pre-attack fair market value. The Smiths argued that family pets are akin to heirlooms, keepsakes, and family pictures that have greater emotional and sentimental value than market value. The circuit court found for Wisconsin Mutual, and the Smiths appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
What to do next…
Here's why 816,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.